THE ORANGE COUNTY REGISTERt

The Earth's temperature hasn't increased significantly in about 15 years, which wouldn't be big news except global warming extremists had predicted temperatures would soar during that time because of manmade greenhouse-gas emissions

That forecast would be just another failed hypothesis, except governments around the world used the threatened overheating as an excuse to regulate, tax and subsidize in order to curb greenhouse gases and, of course, to save the Earth.

In 1989 the Miami Herald quoted a U.N. environment official who warned of a "10-year window of opportunity to solve" global warming, because "entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000." We know how that turned out.

There are new forecasts today. We're not much more confident about them, but considering how far down the costly road to combating global warming the world has gone, they are worth noting.

By Elmer Beauregard

What's the deal with Punxsutawney Phil? I swear, he always sees his shadow no matter what, even if its in the temps are in the 40's and the trees are budding. I have a Groundhog living in my shed (here we call them Woodchucks) and he surely did not see his shadow today. I predict an early spring!

Forget global warming - it’s Cycle 25 we need to worry about (and if NASA scientists are right the Thames will be freezing over again) By David Rose

Last updated at 5:38 AM on 29th January 2012

The supposed ‘consensus’ on man-made global warming is facing an inconvenient challenge after the release of new temperature data showing the planet has not warmed for the past 15 years.

The figures suggest that we could even be heading for a mini ice age to rival the 70-year temperature drop that saw frost fairs held on the Thames in the 17th Century.

Based on readings from more than 30,000 measuring stations, the data was issued last week without fanfare by the Met Office and the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit. It confirms that the rising trend in world temperatures ended in 1997.

A painting, dated 1684, by Abraham Hondius depicts one of many frost fairs on the River Thames during the mini ice age

Meanwhile, leading climate scientists yesterday told The Mail on Sunday that, after emitting unusually high levels of energy throughout the 20th Century, the sun is now heading towards a ‘grand minimum’ in its output, threatening cold summers, bitter winters and a shortening of the season available for growing food.

Solar output goes through 11-year cycles, with high numbers of sunspots seen at their peak.

We are now at what should be the peak of what scientists call ‘Cycle 24’ - which is why last week’s solar storm resulted in sightings of the aurora borealis further south than usual. But sunspot numbers are running at less than half those seen during cycle peaks in the 20th Century.

Analysis by experts at NASA and the University of Arizona - derived from magnetic-field measurements 120,000 miles beneath the sun’s surface - suggest that Cycle 25, whose peak is due in 2022, will be a great deal weaker still.

According to a paper issued last week by the Met Office, there is a 92 per cent chance that both Cycle 25 and those taking place in the following decades will be as weak as, or weaker than, the ‘Dalton minimum’ of 1790 to 1830. In this period, named after the meteorologist John Dalton, average temperatures in parts of Europe fell by 2C.

However, it is also possible that the new solar energy slump could be as deep as the ‘Maunder minimum’ (after astronomer Edward Maunder), between 1645 and 1715 in the coldest part of the ‘Little Ice Age’ when, as well as the Thames frost fairs, the canals of Holland froze solid.

Wall Street journal

Editor's Note: The following has been signed by the 16 scientists listed at the end of the article:

A candidate for public office in any contemporary democracy may have to consider what, if anything, to do about "global warming." Candidates should understand that the oft-repeated claim that nearly all scientists demand that something dramatic be done to stop global warming is not true. In fact, a large and growing number of distinguished scientists and engineers do not agree that drastic actions on global warming are needed.

In September, Nobel Prize-winning physicist Ivar Giaever, a supporter of President Obama in the last election, publicly resigned from the American Physical Society (APS) with a letter that begins: "I did not renew [my membership] because I cannot live with the [APS policy] statement: 'The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring. If no mitigating actions are taken, significant disruptions in the Earth's physical and ecological systems, social systems, security and human health are likely to occur. We must reduce emissions of greenhouse gases beginning now.' In the APS it is OK to discuss whether the mass of the proton changes over time and how a multi-universe behaves, but the evidence of global warming is incontrovertible?"

In spite of a multidecade international campaign to enforce the message that increasing amounts of the "pollutant" carbon dioxide will destroy civilization, large numbers of scientists, many very prominent, share the opinions of Dr. Giaever. And the number of scientific "heretics" is growing with each passing year. The reason is a collection of stubborn scientific facts.

Read the rest of the article here:

Fuelfix.com

Al Gore's self-aggrandizing claim that he "took the initiative in creating the Internet" has haunted him since he first uttered it during a 1999 CNN interview. It makes sense. In a society where people expect to be rewarded for their hard work and good ideas, the public generally abhors those who take credit where it's not due.

For those reasons and others, politicians--especially those seeking reelection--should avoid engaging in unwarranted swagger. President Obama did not.

During his State of the Union address, he applauded his administration for the recent boom in U.S. oil and gas production. Yet as the Institute for Energy Research demonstrates, this growth happened in spite of his policies, not because of them:

The increase in production is occurring on private and state lands, the use of which is much harder for the President to restrict (at least in the short term). Meanwhile, production on federal lands is decreasing significantly ... [His] administration did not hold a single offshore lease sale in fiscal year 2011.

Read the rest of the article here.

Big Government

Warren Buffett's Burlington Northern Santa Fe LLC is among U.S. and Canadian railroads that stand to benefit from the Obama administration's decision to reject TransCanada Corp.'s Keystone XL oil pipeline permit.

With modest expansion, railroads can handle all new oil produced in western Canada through 2030, according to an analysis of the Keystone proposal by the U.S. State Department.

"Whatever people bring to us, we're ready to haul," Krista York-Wooley, a spokeswoman for Burlington Northern, a unit of Buffett's Omaha, Nebraska-based Berkshire Hathaway Inc., said in an interview. If Keystone XL "doesn't happen, we're here to haul."

The State Department denied TransCanada a permit on Jan. 18, saying there was not enough time to study the proposal by Feb. 21, a deadline Congress imposed on President Barack Obama. Calgary-based TransCanada has said it intends to re-apply with a route that avoids an environmentally sensitive region of Nebraska, something the Obama administration encouraged.

The rail option, though costlier, would lessen the environmental impact, such as a loss of wetlands and agricultural productivity, compared to the pipeline, according to the State Department analysis. Greenhouse gas emissions, however, would be worse.

If completed, Keystone XL would deliver 700,000 barrels a day of crude from Alberta's oil sands to refineries along the Gulf of Mexico, crossing 1,661 miles (2,673-kilometers) over Montana, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma and Texas.

Read the rest of the article here.

By Paul Joseph Watson, Prison Planet.com

Months before the debate about Internet censorship raged as SOPA and PIPA dominated the concerns of web users, President Obama signed an international treaty that would allow companies in China or any other country in the world to demand ISPs remove web content in the US with no legal oversight whatsoever.
Obama Signs Global Internet Treaty Worse Than SOPA government stickers acta protest.n

The Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement was signed by Obama on October 1 2011, yet is currently the subject of a White House petition demanding Senators be forced to ratify the treaty. The White House has circumvented the necessity to have the treaty confirmed by lawmakers by presenting it an as "executive agreement," although legal scholars have highlighted the dubious nature of this characterization.

The hacktivist group Anonymous attacked and took offline the Federal Trade Commission's website yesterday in protest against the treaty, which was also the subject of demonstrations across major cities in Poland, a country set to sign the agreement today.

Read the rest of the article here.

By Ron Paul, RonPaul2012.com

"Tonight, President Obama once again showed that he does not represent the fundamental change this country needs."

"Tonight, President Obama once again showed that he does not represent the fundamental change this country needs. Instead of offering solutions to the problems our country faces, the President was intent on delivering a campaign speech, further dealing in the typical Washington political gamesmanship that has gotten us exactly nowhere close to improving the lives of the American people.

"In a speech where much of the rhetoric was devoted to job creation, it was strange that President Obama would brag about his job-destroying national health care plan, Obamacare, and the Dodd-Frank bill, which, contrary to the President's claims, guarantees future taxpayer bailouts of large institutions. Unfortunately, President Obama's 'job creation' policies amount to little more than continuing to allow government bureaucrats to pick winners and losers, which is a recipe for continued economic stagnation.

"President Obama claims to want an economy where everyone gets a fair shot, everyone does their fair share, and everyone plays by the same set of rules. Yet he remains committed to the same old system of debt, deficits, bailouts, and cronyism that created our economic problems. The President speaks of giving us energy independence from unstable nations, yet he refuses to allow the type of development needed to achieve this goal, while at the same time his administration hands out favors to the politically connected - those given to the likes of Solyndra, who fail to produce jobs or energy but succeed in ripping off the taxpayers.

By Steve Watson, PrisonPlanet.com

In preventing Kentucky Senator Rand Paul from flying to Washington this morning, the TSA directly violated the law as written in the US Constitution.
TSA Directly Violated US Constitution By Detaining Senator Rand Paul rand paul constitution patriot act

The Constitution specifically protects federal lawmakers from being detained while en route to Washington DC.

Article I, Section 6 states:

"The Senators and Representatives...shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same...."

Rand Paul was traveling from his home in Louisville to attend a session in the Senate today.

This is the reason that TSA officials have since put out the talking point in the media that Rand Paul was never officially detained, despite the fact that the Senator himself confirmed that he was told to sit in a cubicle and wait without any indication of when he would be allowed to leave.

The Senate is back in session at 2 p.m., and votes are scheduled for 4:30 p.m.

Senator Paul was allowed to board a second flight after a separate screening by TSA agents, however, it remains to be seen whether he will make it to the capital in time.

By Elmer Beauregard

Saw this article in the Startribune I thought it would be a good exercise to highlight all the times WOULD and MAY were used in this article. Plus, I highlighted a few other words as well.

A flying insect that thrives in midwinter MIGHT seem like a creature from a frightening fictional Minnesota.

But Diamesa mendotae, a cold-hardy but delicate insect also known as a midge, is very real and MAY provide a measure of how the state's climate is warming, and what effect that MIGHT have.

Researchers from the University of Minnesota are working to understand more about the relationship between these unusual freeze-resistant insects and the fish that eat them in streams in the southeastern part of the state. The three-year project is primarily about brown trout, a popular target for anglers. "We're THINKING that a changing climate and increasing air temperatures will affect water temperatures, and that COULD reduce [fish] populations," said entomology professor Len Ferrington, principal investigator on the project.

By Josephine Marcotty, StarTribune.com

Turbines planned near Red Wing would endanger protected species.

A controversial wind farm proposed near Red Wing plans to ask for federal permission to legally kill eagles, making it one of the first in the nation to participate in a new federal strategy aimed at managing the often-lethal conflict between birds and turbine blades.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife officials say they urged the developers of AWA Goodhue Wind to seek the new permit because the deaths of an unknown number of eagles and endangered golden eagles will be inevitable once the 50-turbine project is up and running.

The process for such "incidental take" permits was devised in 2009 as a compromise between the demand for clean energy from the growing number of wind farms and the rising concern over the estimated hundreds of thousands of birds and bats that they kill every year.

The 18.75-square-mile site in Goodhue County is home to a number of nesting eagles, and many more migrate through the area every year. There also have been sightings of two rare and endangered golden eagles, which come down from Canada to winter along the Mississippi River bluffs in southeastern Minnesota.

Read the rest of the article here.

By Elmer Beauregard

If I knew how to blackout my site I would.

If SOPA passes I'm sure my site will be one of the first to go. I've already had two run-ins with copyright infringement. The first is when I made Two Below Honey, Van Morrison didn't agree with my "Pro Global Warming Views". I changed it to Three Below Honey but it wasn't nearly as good. The second was when I made Hide the Decline, this time it wasn't the song writer that had a problem but Michael Mann said I used his image without permission, so I made Hide the Decline II.

I also have copyright notices on these videos:
The Eagle and the Hawk, and the Windmills
Chicken Little goes to the State Fair.
I Gotta Feeling - Viking Song
I'm a Denier

PROTECT IP / SOPA Breaks The Internet from Fight for the Future on Vimeo.

By Ron Paul

Last week the Supreme Court heard arguments in Sackett v. EPA, a case of blatant federal agency overreach and abuse of private property rights. Without any proof or reason, and no chance for appeal, the Environmental Protection Agency determined that a small single home lot was a "protected wetland." The owners, Mike and Chantell Sackett, were ordered to halt construction already underway, to remove all of the work already done, and plant trees and shrubs consistent with a wetlands environment. After making these costly changes, the Sackets then would have to wait several years for the EPA to decide if they would be allowed the use of their own property. Refusal to comply with these outrageous and arbitrary commandments would result in daily fines greater than the value of the property!

Outraged, the Sacketts sought relief through the courts, but court after court determined that they had no standing. The actions of the EPA were not subject to judicial review until a mountain of fees had already been assessed. This is just another example not only of how federal agencies wield enormous power over average citizens, but also how little practical protection our court system provides when such citizens are harmed by those agencies.
A decision on this case is expected this summer. My fervent hope is that the Supreme Court will thwart this rogue agency and stand up for property rights and the right of people to have their day in court when they find themselves unwittingly accosted by the EPA.

My own district in Texas is no stranger to these issues. Again, with no evidence to support their decision, the EPA arbitrarily determined Matagorda County to be an "Ozone Nonattainment Region", meaning the air quality is substandard. In fact, the population in this county has been decreasing and the small amount of emissions reported from Matagorda County has actually declined in recent years. The Texas agency charged with environmental protection disagrees with the EPA. Yet Matagorda County, like the Sacketts, finds itself at the mercy of the EPA. New business and construction will be stymied until the Washington masters are satisfied.

Unless Congress acts, EPA bureaucrats will continue to inflict potentially devastating economic consequences on communities like Matagorda County and people like the Sacketts. Destroying the economy is no way to save the environment. A thriving economy and a fair judicial system that respects property rights and the Constitution provide the best protection of the environment.

By Elmer Beauregard

Jon Huntsman by far was the most vocal on his belief of Global Warming has dropped out of the race but other GOP hopefuls are still on the fence

"Listen, when you make comments that fly in the face of what 98 out of 100 climate scientists have said, when you call into question the science of evolution, all I'm saying is that, in order for the Republican Party to win, we can't run from science," - Jon Huntsman

Newt Gingrich has flip flopped on this issue, I think he just changes his stance depending on his audience. Here is what he said on Bill O'reilly's show:

"I don't think we know. I think that the evidence is not complete, and I think we're a long way from being able to translate a computer program into actual science." - Newt Gingrich

after he said this on the couch with Nancy Pelosi about passing Cap and Trade:

"we do agree that our country must take action to address Climate Change." - Newt Gingrich

Mitt Romney is straddling the fence on Global Warming he believes in it but:

"is not certain to the extent that man is causing the change in the environment."

even though back in June he said this:

"I believe the world's getting warmer. I can't prove that, but I believe based on what I read that the world is getting warmer. And number two, I believe that humans contribute to that."

Rick Perry has stated that he does not believe in Global Warming even though he worked on Al Gore's campaign in 1988:

"I think we're seeing almost weekly, or even daily, scientists that are coming forward and questioning the original idea that man-made global warming is what is causing the climate to change" - Rick Perry

Rick Santorumis also more skeptical than Newt or Mitt:

"I don't think any scientist in the world would suggest there isn't a variety of factors, and I think the vast majority of scientists would say there's probably a hundred factors that cause the climate to change.... And so why have we decided that this one particular factor, carbon dioxide, is in fact that tip of the tail that wags the entire dog?" - Rick Santorum

And finally Ron Paul wants to eliminate the EPA and the DoE and I agree with him.

"The greatest hoax I think that has been around for many, many years if not hundreds of years has been this hoax on global warming." - Ron Paul

By Elmer Beauregard

NASA sent out two spacecraft yesterday to orbit around the moon to try to answer some age old questions. One question they hope to solve is why is the far side of the moon so different than the near side?

The side of the moon that faces Earth is flat and mostly smooth. The other side is filled with craters from asteroid strikes. One theory is the earth helped protect it from asteroid strikes on the side that faces us. I'm sure that has happened to some extent but the difference is so dramatic I think it has to be something else.

Elmer's Theory About Everything

I think the reason there are more craters on the far side of the moon is because a lot of asteroids hit it at the same time, from the same direction, instead of many single asteroid strikes over millions of years. I think it is evidence of one major catastrophic event.

If the asteroid strikes were spread out over millions of years at random times from different directions you'd would get a completely different crater pattern. The moon would always be in a different position depending on the time of the year and time of day.

This is probably the same catastrophic event that caused the great flood approximately 4,400 years ago. The theory goes that a large comet made of ice passed very close to the earth and chunks of the tail hit the moon and the earth and probably Mars and Mercury (which is why there are traces of water on those planets). Instead of the us protecting the moon it looks like the moon may have protected us.

But it still changed the earth dramatically, it caused the earth to tilt on axis by 22 degrees it may have lengthened our solar year from 260 days to 365, either by speeding up our rotation or lengthening our orbit or both. It also caused the Great Flood and instantly created the North and South Poles. This would explain herds of Woolly Mammoths with tropical vegetation still in their mouths found frozen in the ice in both the Arctic and Antarctic. It didn't happen gradually it happened in one giant cataclysmic event and we have been slowly thawing out ever since.

More to come...

By Elmer Beauregard

UPDATE: I finally found some more stuff on his website, it's kind of hidden. He has a subdomain called. support.ricksantorum.com I looked on his issues page but I can't find anything about global warming or energy policy. He must not think its an issue.

After Rick Santorum's surprise second place finish last night and Michele Bachmann's dropping out this morning, I figured I better check this guy out, I don't know much about him.

So I went to his official website www.RickSantorum.com but all I can see is just a donate page.

I was hoping to go and see for instance what his official stance on Global Warming and Energy Policy was but everything I click just goes back his donate page. Am I missing something?

Maybe the Iowa GOP's website is Santorum's official site, if you look at the header its says to "ALSO VISIT - www.RickSantorum.com ~ Conservative Presidential Candidate" which of course just leads you to his donate page.

Maybe this is why Rick Santorum's nephew supports Ron Paul.

Paul Joseph Watson, Prison Planet.com


Concerns about subversion grow after Republican strategist says GOP establishment will not allow Ron Paul to win

Tonight's final vote tally for the Iowa caucuses will take place at a secret undisclosed location, an announcement that has stoked fears of vote fraud amongst Ron Paul supporters, concerns that were heightened following a Republican insider's claim that the GOP establishment will not allow Paul to win.

The final Iowa vote count normally takes place at state party headquarters in Des Moines, but following dubious "security concerns" about Occupy protesters disrupting the tabulation process, the Republican Party of Iowa announced that it would be moving the final vote count to a secret undisclosed location.

The move occurred despite Occupy protest leaders confirming there were no plans to disrupt the caucuses themselves.

"Votes in each of the 1,774 precincts will still be counted on location, and observers from the campaigns will be able to watch that process. That precinct information will then be conveyed to the state party's tabulation center," reports CNN.

WatchtheVote2012.com warns that not only Paul, but also Michele Bachmann and Rick Santorum are "in grave danger of being cheated on Iowa caucus night 2012 by the Iowa State GOP and the 5 big TV networks."

Read rest of the article here.

"They're going to keep him from getting the number one spot because they are concerned."

Paul Joseph Watson, Prison Planet.com

Republican strategist Dee Dee Benkie revealed during a radio show appearance last night that the GOP establishment has resolved to prevent Ron Paul from winning tonight's Iowa primary by offering sweetheart deals to move large voting blocks to vote for Romney or Santorum.

The host of the show refers to state GOP insiders showing "great concern" that Ron Paul is performing well in Iowa because they fear a Paul win would undermine Iowa's position as being the first Republican primary. He implies that influential members of the Republican establishment within the state are offering sweetheart deals to prominent voting blocks in key swing districts in order to "sway" the result and ensure Ron Paul doesn't win.

Despite the fact that this is brazenly unethical and, if bribery was involved, without doubt illegal, the host dismisses such conduct as "just politics".

"Is it possible that the party apparatus here could be silently asking those District Chairmen to start swaying some important caucus members over to the anti-Paul side which may end up being Santorum...do you see a scenario like that happening," he asked Benkie.

"I've talked to the party officials, I know they're concerned about it," said Benkie, adding, "Ron Paul doesn't do us any good in Iowa, doesn't do the country any good, will never get there, so let's figure out what we need to do."

Prison Planet.com

(CBS News)

By Elmer Beauregard

Minnesota is experiencing a very nice warm winter this year, in fact we just had a brown Christmas. Nobody is blaming it on Global Warming that I have seen but I'm sure they will soon. It is so warm up here that Ice houses are sinking through the ice.

Here is a piece that Kare 11 did on that subject.

Before people start doing the Chicken Little thing and cry "The Globe Is Warming!" I would like to remind everyone that we have had this kind of winter before, and it seems to happen every eleven years or so.

I remember the non-winters of '88 and '99, both of those years people were playing golf in January in Minnesota. Now in 2011 twelve years after the last one we are having a very mild winter, the thing is I was expecting it.

Caveman Forcaster


There seems to be a correlation between these mild winters and the solar cycle or sunspot cycle. If you look at this chart you will see the the solar activity goes up and down like a yo-yo on an eleven year cycle. I was looking for a warm winter in 2010 and it didn't happen but sure enough one year later we get a little break from the severe winters we've had in the last few years. So hope to see you on the golf course real soon.

By Ron Paul, pau.house.gov

Little by little, in the name of fighting terrorism, our Bill of Rights is being repealed. The 4th amendment has been rendered toothless by the PATRIOT Act. No more can we truly feel secure in our persons, houses, papers, and effects when now there is an exception that fits nearly any excuse for our government to search and seize our property. Of course, the vast majority of Americans may say "I'm not a terrorist, so I have no reason to worry." However, innocent people are wrongly accused all the time. The Bill of Rights is there precisely because the founders wanted to set a very high bar for the government to overcome in order to deprive an individual of life or liberty. To lower that bar is to endanger everyone. When the bar is low enough to include political enemies, our descent into totalitarianism is virtually assured.

The PATRIOT Act, as bad is its violation of the 4th Amendment, was just one step down the slippery slope. The recently passed National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) continues that slip toward tyranny and in fact accelerates it significantly. The main section of concern, Section 1021 of the NDAA Conference Report, does to the 5th Amendment what the PATRIOT Act does to the 4th. The 5th Amendment is about much more than the right to remain silent in the face of government questioning. It contains very basic and very critical stipulations about due process of law. The government cannot imprison a person for no reason and with no evidence presented or access to legal counsel.

By Craig Rucker, wattsupwiththat.com

EPA mercury rules for electricity generating units are based on false science and economics

The Environmental Protection Agency claims its "final proposed" Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) rules will eliminate toxic pollution from electrical generating units, bring up to $140 billion in annual health benefits, and prevent thousands of premature deaths yearly - all for "only" $11 billion a year in compliance costs.

This may be true in the virtual reality of EPA computer models, linear extrapolations, cherry-picked health studies and statistics, government press releases and agency-generated public comments. However, in the real world inhabited by families, employers and other energy users, the new rules will bring few benefits, but will impose extensive costs that the agency chose to minimize or ignore in its analysis.

Emissions of mercury and other air toxics from power plants have been declining steadily for decades, as older generating units have been replaced with more efficient, less polluting systems or retrofitted with better pollution control technologies. While a few older plants still violate EPA's draconian proposed rules - the new rules are not based on credible scientific and epidemiological studies.

Read more here.